Login
Login

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Larry Don McQuay

:The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. MBisanz talk 01:30, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

=[[Larry Don McQuay]]=

:{{la|Larry Don McQuay}} ([{{fullurl:Larry Don McQuay|wpReason={{urlencode: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Larry Don McQuay}}&action=delete}} delete]) – (View AfD)(View log)

No assertion of notability. Non-notable criminal. --MZMcBride (talk) 05:51, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

  • Delete, sadly there is nothing at all unusual or noteworthy about this person. Risker (talk) 05:53, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:02, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
  • Keep Needs to be expanded, better sourced, but I remember this case; the issue of the castration request IMHO makes him unique and notable (pending sourcing) -- 7triton7 (talk) 03:54, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz talk 00:01, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

  • Keep. Lots of news coverage and discussion, and even [http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Larry%20Don%20McQuay%20law&um=1&ned=us&hl=en&sa=N&tab=ns scholarly coverage] (see the Florida Law Review article, e.g.).  J L G 4 1 0 4  03:56, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz talk 00:01, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

  • Delete The subject is an awful, awful person but does not meet our inclusion standards. As a criminal known for only one event (and the medical curiosity that he requested castration afterward), he failed to meet WP:BLP1E criteria for living people. Since he is a BLP article, I suggest that we assume non-notable until determined otherwise and this article does not demonstrate his notability sufficiently. JRP (talk) 01:14, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

:The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.